America and Europeans

[Ingwaz]

Originally Posted by Dr. Solar Wolff

The fact is that there is no one America. That is gone. Now, I and others like me want what is due us, a piece of this land-America for our own country.

How true! There is no one America (and I would actually hazard that there never has been either) and this is one point that I find many Europeans to either ignore or not be aware of at all. They tend to speak of us as this monolithic monstrosity (well, there is some evidence of this, actually ) and yet this is not the whole story. The trends are heading that way but the homogenization is not yet complete.

Personally, I have no loyalty to the America(s) as we now see it (them) but instead, I have loyalty and concern for the region of North America that I am from--New England and the Maritime provinces of Canada. Places like Texas, Florida & California are foreign to me on many levels and I feel no affiliation with them and I also have little concern for their directions (outside of the notion that no place exists in a vacuum and there are interconnections galore...). The first of my genetic material to reach these shores was through an Englishman, Barnabas Horton, who landed in what is now Hampton, New Hampshire--a scant 120 miles (193 km) from where I now live--some 380 years ago. I am a New Englander through and through and if the US were to ever (blessedly!) break apart in my lifetime, it is here that I would make my stand.

I'm not alone in this feeling or regionality and it seems to be stronger in places that have either been settled longer by Europids (New England, Appalachia, The South) or that have remained fairly homogenous in their ethnic history (Finns in the Upper Peninsula of Michigan, Swedes and Norwegians in Iowa, Minnesota & Wisconsin) than in places where the amalgam is more recent and more diverse (Florida, Arizona, California). Others feel as I do about their particular region and in some ways, this regionality serves a similar function to nationalism in Europe. I understand that the roots are not nearly as deep as those in the Old World but it is what we have and I support an intra-American......provincialism.....if you will.

With regard to the infamous White Nationalism, I have little to say as it is not a tenet that I have addressed much from a political standpoint. One thing that instinctually comes to mind though, is that we, who wish to preserve Europid America, have little choice. As has been noted, we are a blend of nations and ethnicities and beyond those who are literally the direct product of immigration from a European country, we would have to arbitrarily chose a National affinity....and that is just silly. So, when theorizing about the future and some White Nation we have to take into account that most Europid Americans are English/German/Irish/Scottish/Dutch/Italian/Spanish/Polish/Danish/Russian/etc./etc. in varying percentages. Many of you Europeans scoff at White Nationalism but without defending the premise myself, I ask you this: what would you have us do in place of such a doctrine if we wish to preserve our Europidness? And yes, I am speaking strictly from a biological standpoint in this case--cultural aspects have long been dropped, blended and regionalized.

I understand that White Nationalism has no place in old, mother Europe and I would never advocate it there but here, in what may be our last days relatively untainted, we may have no other choice.

With regard to Europe herself and her difficulties, I really shouldn't speak as she is not mine to claim (beyond my biological, cultural and linguistic origins--that's all ) but I surely offer my support and camaraderie in any affairs that are positive for the native folk and nations there. So, when I am a high ranking governmental official of the North Atlantic States of America, rest assured--you will have my backing. I can also offer my apologies for the unwieldy actions of this giant vehicle that is America and its plurality of drivers steering to all points of the compass.

I guess that I've said enough now...

[Milesian]

Originally Posted by Ingwaz

With regard to the infamous White Nationalism, I have little to say as it is not a tenet that I have addressed much from a political standpoint. One thing that instinctually comes to mind though, is that we, who wish to preserve Europid America, have little choice. As has been noted, we are a blend of nations and ethnicities and beyond those who are literally the direct product of immigration from a European country, we would have to arbitrarily chose a National affinity....and that is just silly. So, when theorizing about the future and some White Nation we have to take into account that most Europid Americans are English/German/Irish/Scottish/Dutch/Italian/Spanish/Polish/Danish/Russian/etc./etc. in varying percentages. Many of you Europeans scoff at White Nationalism but without defending the premise myself, I ask you this: what would you have us do in place of such a doctrine if we wish to preserve our Europidness? And yes, I am speaking strictly from a biological standpoint in this case--cultural aspects have long been dropped, blended and regionalized.

I think that is a very good question, Ingwaz.
First of all, however, I want to make a comparison.
Now, I have no intention of insulting Americans or people of mixed ethnicities, nor do I seek to compare them with this other group. However, it is perhaps worthwhile to compare the problems of mixing either inter-ethnically or inter-racially. The latter is far more extreme than the former, obviously.
However, they are both alike in the fact that they can cause bewilderment and confusion over one's identity. What's to do? Choose one part of the heritage and identify with that to the exclusion of the other(s)? Form a new identity altogether.

To take your question to the extreme, what if mixed-race people in Europe asked the same question - "What would you have us do"?

What do we do with those people? Do we banish them? Do we accept them as the same as us? Some middle course? A third option? Are mixed race or mixed ethnic people reconcillable with native European, monoracial, monoethnics?

To be honest, WN might be workable in some modified form in the former colonies. It is obvious at this point that identifying with ethnicities isn't going to work for America. The population is too inter-mixed now. So, I have always agreed that WN makes a certain amount of sense from their viewpoint.
The question, rather, is how can we keep a political ideology designed with America in mind from leaking out into Europe and damaging it (bearing in mind that it is simply another form of multiculturalism, albeit with a racist streak)?
Opposing those who willfully export it is one.

[Siegmund]

Originally Posted by Ingwaz

As has been noted, we are a blend of nations and ethnicities and beyond those who are literally the direct product of immigration from a European country, we would have to arbitrarily chose a National affinity....and that is just silly. So, when theorizing about the future and some White Nation we have to take into account that most Europid Americans are English/German/Irish/Scottish/Dutch/Italian/Spanish/Polish/Danish/Russian/etc./etc. in varying percentages.

On the other hand, embracing one's "whiteness" is a cultural nonstarter, a lowest common denominator approach to identity - and one that is largely defined by what it is not. It's no wonder that white nationalism is so redolent of hate mongering, whether of Jews or blacks or whatever. It affords a sense of group identity and solidarity in the absence of a meaningful cultural alternative.

So I'm not sure it's silly at all to suggest that Americans of mixed European heritage consider picking one and sticking to it. I don't mean simply choosing Bavarian rather than Swedish pancakes in the morning, but choosing a German rather than Swedish mate if one is of mixed German and Swedish ethnicity, and then abiding by German traditions rather than those of the mainstream culture. And again, I don't mean setting up some sort of anachronistic fetishism for an idealized past, but setting up a German household based on a realistic grasp of ethnic cultural and historical values, at least to the extent possible given the contextual limitations of America. If things go as well as they possibly can, then one's children might likewise wish to select a German mate, and after a generation or two the family is mostly German.

But I fear that would be just too much hard intellectual and practical work for most white nationalists, or for anyone. It's much easier to simply declare oneself reborn in the blood of Whiteness, than to actually live an ethical life in accordance with one's principles.

[Milesian]

Originally Posted by Siegmund

I don't mean setting up some sort of anachronistic fetishism for an idealized past, but setting up a German household based on a realistic grasp of ethnic cultural and historical values

I think that sentiment needs to be stressed.
It actually reminds me of what Goering, of all people, once wrote

Originally Posted by Herman Goering

Naturally there are always people ...... who have all kinds of fantastic and confused plans.......who overstate their declaration to blood and soil, who in their romantic dreams are surronded by Wotan and Thor and the like. Such exaggerations can harm.....

I think that your proposal of a common sense grasp of realistic ethnic values is something that must be taken seriously. Reality must always be promoted over romantic fetishism and morbid archaelogicalism.

[Gil]

As alot of people have said above, the issue in America is very different from Europe in the sense that in Europe the "fight" is mainly to preserve one's ethnic group and culture while in the US the "fight" is between maintaining a set of ethnic groups against mixed race "culture", this set of ethnic groups being mainly what the americans call WASP (white anglo-saxon protestant).
The problem with this tag is that it's very superficial and eliminates exactly what most european nationalists strive to defend: one's particular ethnicity. Irish, English, Germans, Swedish, etc, are all tagged "white", and that clearly disrupts the main principle of european nationalism: the ethnicity.
I think that perhaps for the US, which clearly lacks a national "ethnicity" (there is no such thing as a "ethnic american".... perhaps only the indigenous tribes can be called that) it's ok to harbour such feelings and support said differentiation but for Europe that is counterproductive.
Also, as a sidenote, I think that most americans consider themselves "half-this" and "half-that" because it's almost a trend and as a ego-driven action. Alot of people seek attention and their way to "stand out" is by saying their roots are from a diverse background.

[Ingwaz]

Originally Posted by Milesian

I think that is a very good question, Ingwaz.

Thanks, sir.

First of all, however, I want to make a comparison.
Now, I have no intention of insulting Americans or people of mixed ethnicities, nor do I seek to compare them with this other group. However, it is perhaps worthwhile to compare the problems of mixing either inter-ethnically or inter-racially. The latter is far more extreme than the former, obviously.

The former in this case has already happened to a considerable degree whereas for the latter, there is still hope of prevention. And I agree that interracial homogenization is a much worse scenario. Culture, religion and language can be shed and learned anew--genetics however, is far from ephemeral.

However, they are both alike in the fact that they can cause bewilderment and confusion over one's identity.

I've never been bewildered and confused. Nor do I find it a hindrance to my self-awareness. I suppose though, that if my heritage was flung more far-afield than it is, the story might be different. It's not like I'm Inuit/Zulu/Ainu/Australian Aboriginal (or other 'white' Americans either). The way I see it, my Dutch/English/German/Scottish/Irish heritage is really nothing more than a reuniting of aboriginal NW Europid lineage only sundered from one another by political borders for a few thousand years.

What's to do? Choose one part of the heritage and identify with that to the exclusion of the other(s)? Form a new identity altogether.

Again, I'm a New Englander whose roots are basically the same as other old stock New Englanders. See above.

So yes, I new identity has formed over the past few centuries

To take your question to the extreme, what if mixed-race people in Europe asked the same question - "What would you have us do"?

Simple: stick with other racially mixed people. I would say the same here.

What do we do with those people? Do we banish them?

Yes!

Do we accept them as the same as us?

Hell no!

Are mixed race or mixed ethnic people reconcillable with native European, monoracial, monoethnics?

No. But there are degrees. A New World Europid such as myself would be far less detrimental--from a racial/biological standpoint--to Europe than some Mulatto or Mestizo. Don't you think?

Don't worry though, I don't exactly see many Europid Americans repatriating themselves back to Europe. I'm not going anywhere....well, I've thought to moving to Canada but that would be about it.

To be honest, WN might be workable in some modified form in the former colonies. It is obvious at this point that identifying with ethnicities isn't going to work for America. The population is too inter-mixed now. So, I have always agreed that WN makes a certain amount of sense from their viewpoint.

While flawed, again, it might be our only choice at this point.

The question, rather, is how can we keep a political ideology designed with America in mind from leaking out into Europe and damaging it (bearing in mind that it is simply another form of multiculturalism, albeit with a racist streak)?

Good question. I wonder though if this might be the least of a racialist European's concerns--I mean with swarms of Pakistanis, Indians, Moroccans, Turks and the like buzzing around in your nations. I don't advocate pan-Europeanism but would you rather your Scotsman buddy to marry a French woman or an Indian?



It's good to think, eh?

[Ingwaz]

Originally Posted by Siegmund

On the other hand, embracing one's "whiteness" is a cultural nonstarter, a lowest common denominator approach to identity - and one that is largely defined by what it is not. It's no wonder that white nationalism is so redolent of hate mongering, whether of Jews or blacks or whatever. It affords a sense of group identity and solidarity in the absence of a meaningful cultural alternative.

I would argue that biology is the highest common denominator. As I said in my last post--things such as culture, language and religion can be cast off or adopted. Our genetic structure as Europids can not be remade once diluted or undone.

So I'm not sure it's silly at all to suggest that Americans of mixed European heritage consider picking one and sticking to it. I don't mean simply choosing Bavarian rather than Swedish pancakes in the morning, but choosing a German rather than Swedish mate if one is of mixed German and Swedish ethnicity, and then abiding by German traditions rather than those of the mainstream culture. And again, I don't mean setting up some sort of anachronistic fetishism for an idealized past, but setting up a German household based on a realistic grasp of ethnic cultural and historical values, at least to the extent possible given the contextual limitations of America. If things go as well as they possibly can, then one's children might likewise wish to select a German mate, and after a generation or two the family is mostly German.

Sounds good to me. Especially the pancakes.

But I fear that would be just too much hard intellectual and practical work for most white nationalists, or for anyone. It's much easier to simply declare oneself reborn in the blood of Whiteness, than to actually live an ethical life in accordance with one's principles.

It would take a fair bit of self-awareness, yes--though by no means impossible. My wife and I share similar ethnic/national backgrounds and we live in an older, rural New England fashion--we are independent land owners, we attend town meeting and are active in the community, grow our own vegetables & fruit, press our own cider, cut our own firewood, buy local products, etc.....and we are 45 miles from the nearest McDonald's and Wal-Mart and we patronize them not!

[Gil]

Originally Posted by Ingwaz

I would argue that biology is the highest common denominator. As I said in my last post--things such as culture, language and religion can be cast off or adopted. Our genetic structure as Europids can not be remade once diluted or undone.

If only it was as simple as that... the fact remains that "ethnicity" is by far and large defined by morphology than genetics (hence the white in White Anglo-Saxon), and wrongly defined. You can have two persons of the same ethnic background and with the same genetic patterns but differing (within a certain range) in morphological terms. Also, in "White Nationalism" genetics are usually discarded in favour of "looks": if you "look" European or of european ancestry you are "accepted". Little do they know that, for example, there are plenty of Ashkenazi Jews who are pretty much europid looking or simply put descendants of mixed couples who within 2-3 generations of mixing with "whites" become "whites" themselves.

Apart that, I think you actually defined what you truly believe your heritage is: New Englander. Before and foremost you respect and feel attached to your community, your immediate "kin" and as a result you tend to view with hostily those who defend the "black" or "mixed" lobby. That happens here (Europe) too though not under the guise of "White Nationalism" but of "Nationalism", at least the type of Nationalism I respect as rational and logical.

[Milesian]

Originally Posted by Ingwaz

The former in this case has already happened to a considerable degree whereas for the latter, there is still hope of prevention. And I agree that interracial homogenization is a much worse scenario. Culture, religion and language can be shed and learned anew--genetics however, is far from ephemeral.

I see this often, not just from many Americans but also from Europeans who have subscribed to the WN ideology. The belief that race is over-riding and that culture, religion, language, etc are mere trivialities.

It does not have to be said that without all these things, we wouldn't be who were are. We could shed them and learn them anew. However, we would no longer be who we are. We would no longer be what we are. For people who think this way, losing one's identity through racial destruction is a catastrophe. Losing it through cultural and ethnic destruction is regarded with a quick utterance of "C'est la vie", apparently.

The fact remains, loss of identity is undesirable and unacceptable, no matter what form it comes in. So actually, I disagree. I do not consider one to be better or worse than the other. One kind of destruction is not preferable to another, in much the same way as death by guillotine or lethal injection is largely immaterial.

I've never been bewildered and confused. Nor do I find it a hindrance to my self-awareness. I suppose though, that if my heritage was flung more far-afield than it is, the story might be different. It's not like I'm Inuit/Zulu/Ainu/Australian Aboriginal (or other 'white' Americans either).

Really?

The way I see it, my Dutch/English/German/Scottish/Irish heritage is really nothing more than a reuniting of aboriginal NW Europid lineage only sundered from one another by political borders for a few thousand years.

That's not quite true though is it? I mean the Irish and English populations alone are genetically distinguishable from each other. On the one hand you have your English/Dutch which are probably the two who are closest to each other (genetically). The German is likely somewhat further removed from that. Further down the line again, you have your Scottish. Last you have your Irish.
So not only culturally, linguistically -basically ethnically, but also these populations are genetically discernable.

I understand that you group them into a NW European identity (+Nordvestrid+, anyone? ), not that NW Europeans tend to go around thinking of themselves as NW Europeans, mind you. But one could as easily say - I'm English, German, Spanish, Norwegian. I'm merely a re-uniting of W Europid lineage. Or - I'm Scottish, Finnish, Greek, Swiss. I'm merely a re-uniting of Europid lineage. We could take it to the extreme and see that people of mixed races could claim to be nothing more than the re-uniting of Homo Sapiens.

Bad anaologies aside (), are NW Europeans homogenous? Even today, they are not genetically homogenous. And they are certainly not culturally/ethnically homogenous. So, I'm forced to conclude that they are not.

Again, I'm a New Englander whose roots are basically the same as other old stock New Englanders. See above.

So yes, I new identity has formed over the past few centuries

So you identify yourself within a new ethnicity, then?

Simple: stick with other racially mixed people. I would say the same here.

The same applies to ethnically mixed people, or not?

Yes!



Hell no!

Same question as above.

No. But there are degrees. A New World Europid such as myself would be far less detrimental--from a racial/biological standpoint--to Europe than some Mulatto or Mestizo. Don't you think?

From a purely racial point of view, yes.
You could still be introducing something foreign to the gene pool, or at least something uncommon, from a genetics point of view. That's leaving aside such things as language, culture, etc as you deem them as meaningless anyway.

Don't worry though, I don't exactly see many Europid Americans repatriating themselves back to Europe. I'm not going anywhere....

Who's worrying?

well, I've thought to moving to Canada but that would be about it.

Canada? I thought you lot hated those guys

While flawed, again, it might be our only choice at this point.

That might well be the case.

Good question. I wonder though if this might be the least of a racialist European's concerns--I mean with swarms of Pakistanis, Indians, Moroccans, Turks and the like buzzing around in your nations.

What you must realise is that it is very much a concern.
WN will never be acceptable to the vast majority of Europeans. It is not only unpalatable, but it does not serve our needs nor the reality of Europe/Europeans. Thus, it is actually detrimental because it taints realistic opposition to multiculturalism/multiracialism by association.
And what if it did succeed in becoming a force in European politics?
It would certainly eliminate traditional European Nationalism, as it considers it trivial and an obstacle to forming it's Great White Worldwide family.
Europeans will be forced then to choose between the status quo (Mixed-Race Multiculturalism) or WN (Mono-Race Multiculturalism).

Rock / Hard Place..........Frying Pan / Fire........

I don't advocate pan-Europeanism but would you rather your Scotsman buddy to marry a French woman or an Indian?

Scots jus loci, Irish jus sanguis? Then they should marry a similar girl.

Scottish jus loci and jus sanguis? Then as long as it's not a New Englander, I don't care j/k

It's good to think, eh?

I wouldn't know. I let David Duke do my thinking for me, although maybe Scáthach's new ideology is more workable:-

Originally Posted by Scáthach

we'll have to build a compound where we can raise our children in interesting circumstances

- The 15 words

[Milesian]

Originally Posted by Manji

by far and large defined by morphology than genetics (hence the white in White Anglo-Saxon), and wrongly defined

Indeed, does "White" = Caucasian race?
Judging from the opinions that come from within the WN community (far less the fact that they cannot even agree with each other), then I would have to say - No.

So it is more a construct based on ethnic background.
I know WN's who only consider NW Europeans to be "White.
I know other who only include W Europeans or N Europeans. Others would include any European proper. Not many would include Arabs or Turks or Iranians (yes, ok. PANF ), despite that fact that they are technically Caucasian as well.
So although ethnicity and cultural heritage are seen as something trivial and disposable, there would be no concept(s) of "White" without them

[Siegmund]

Originally Posted by Ingwaz

I would argue that biology is the highest common denominator.

I think Manji put it very well when he said earlier, with respect to WASP mixed race culture, that

Originally Posted by Manji

[t]he problem with this tag is that it's very superficial and eliminates exactly what most european nationalists strive to defend: one's particular ethnicity. Irish, English, Germans, Swedish, etc, are all tagged "white", and that clearly disrupts the main principle of european nationalism: the ethnicity.

That's one of my main objections as well: "white" is simply a grab bag of Europid ethnicities and, as such, it is none of them. Biology has indeed triumphed, but just as importantly so has culture, or rather the homogenization or erasure of cultural identity that tends to result from intra-Europid race mixing. In the typical case, the critical ethnic, cultural and historical differentiation that actually defines the discrete Europid identities has been lost.

In your reply to Milesian, you stated:

Originally Posted by Ingwaz

The way I see it, my Dutch/English/German/Scottish/Irish heritage is really nothing more than a reuniting of aboriginal NW Europid lineage only sundered from one another by political borders for a few thousand years.

My perspective is somewhat different. I can't help but reflect upon the fact that the aboriginal NW Europid lineage you reference was bereft of the ethnocultural heritage and consciousness that developed after it was sundered. So this reunion, this return to Europid roots, hearkens back to a blank culture - and that's pretty much the situation of many mixed race American "whites" today: they have no genuine ethnic heritage, no thousand year (or more) history of cultural achievement and consiousness. They're just blank, ready to absorb whatever mainstream American culture feeds them on the talk shows and reality tv.

Your own situation appears quite different, of course. I get the feeling that you partake of a coherent, indigenous New England culture with its own customs and traditions. Though it undoubtedly has antecedents in and is derivative of the various ethnocultural strands that comprise your genetic makeup, it seems to be a distinct cultural (and biological) ethnos of its own.